I don't presume to speak for Jimbo, but first of all, please realise that
Wikipedia is not an exercise in democracy, it is an encyclopedia.
Next, we do have several avenues of dispute resolution (please see
). In this, the
last step in the dispute resolution process is to request arbitration, where
a group (called the "Arbitration Committee") is very similar to that of
which you speak. This already well-defined process of dispute resolution
would make your suggestion more than a little superfluous.
I hope this helps, and thank you for contacting the Wikipedia-l mailing
On 9/11/06, Peter Rocky7 <freudianjungianp(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
I only suggest that Each Wikipedia, first of all, English Wikipedia needs
have the administration of justice, this is, the board of inspectors to
investigate whether the behaviors of admins are appropriate or not.
This organization, of course, must be independent from all admins.
In mature democrratic countries, as you know, the prosecutors and the
are independent from each other.
In Wikipedias, however, all admins have been doing the role of prosecutors
and the role of the judges and the role of general editors at the same
I think, this system cannot help making almost admins unreliable dictators
and increasing various vandalisms including the admin's vandalism.
So I think each Wikipedia, especially English Wikipedia, needs the board
Inspectors independent from all admins as soon as possible
and the board of inspectors should remove inappropriate admins as soon as
This is the best way because it is the most possible and the most
I think true Wikipedians are expected to make Wikipedias evolve to
Clearly English Wikipedia are holding terribly selfish admins because some
of them rejected this suggestion to be released, read, and talked on the
mailing list <WikiEN-l(a)wikipedia.org>rg>.
Please don't be afraid if you are a good admin. In order to defend good
admins, there should be another court composed of the independent agents.
This court would be like "the Committee for the Inquest of Prosecution".
Respect, and you are ordinarily respected among the mature democratic
This principle, however, cannot be used to Chinese, Koreans, Russians,
If you respect them, they get arrogant forever as if they are the absolute
Even on English Wikipedia, the most important official policy
[[Wikipedia:NPOV]] is often ignored by the admins themselves
when the article is treating the problems that the admins want a victory
their own belief.
The articles involving territorial problems, political problems,
problems, gender problems, etc. are quite dangerous for good admins and
neutral superior editors
because bad admins have been waiting to revert the articles and block
Bad admins are supposed to become admins in order to get a virtual victory
on their belief in Wikipedia.
In other words we can know very easily whether a admin is a good admin or
not in such cases.
Even in the articles of English Wikipedia, if they are having
the invasive side wins and the invaded side loses
as if English Wikipedia recommends all the human beings(nations) to invade
and make the regions under their administration.
See [[Kuril Islands dispute]], [[Dokdo]], etc. It's internationally unfair
and quite dangerous and terribly against the international peace and other
spirits of UN.
I have thought, "The admins of English Wikipedia hope WW3 and become the
enemy of the world?"
Such a bias by the admins and other editors put the peaceful Wikipedians
respect [[Wikipedia:NPOV]] in an embarrassing position and make some of
Since 1945 what merit is there to please the invasive peoples of invasive
nations like Russians, Koreans, Chinese, etc?
Clearly American, British, Australian,,,,, and Japanese Wikipedians have
if they(we) are on invasive side
because their(our) mature democratic countries have already denied getting
new territory by invasive selfish war.
I think there is few persons in the world who have thought Americans are
going to take Iraq as a new territory of US.
US, UK, Americans, British, and English(the language) are so respected in
If not, all nations in the world already attacked US, UK and Israel
English Wikipedia has the same problems.
The foresight of Jimmy Wales, the history of Wikipedia and
are so much respected, but how about admins of English Wikipedia?
They are respected?
The system and its policies they made are deemed reasonable and
For example, the official policy of three times revert seems to be a
trap made by the admins.
Admins can revert, revert, revert, revert, revert,..., permanently, but a
Wikipedian who is not a admin is blocked for a long time just because he
imitates the admins' behaviors only three times.
Why the admins of English Wikipedia are imitating the worst part of Bush's
I think everyone including German admins knows that
English Wikipedia should show and prevail the comfortable and reasonable
model of Wikipedia
to other language's Wikipedians. But not yet. No sign.
Probably the admins of German Wikipedia could not wait the evolution of
and take the worst method that insists :
"We are (I am?) the God! We need not and cannot respect any editors any
We (can) know exactly all things in the world, so, we can release all the
Probably they have been getting more and more contempt because of their
fascism and ignorance.
I have already seen this again and again in Japanese Wikipedia.
In Japanese Wikipedia almost real Japanese editors have given up
to make the administration of Japanese Wikipedia reasonable and
because the admins, including their sockpuppets, are terribly crazy
Korean(or Chinese) fascists
who are not able to use Japanese correctly and exactly and rejecting all
just because such meaningful conversations are disadvantage for them. They
call those meaningful conversations "personal attacks".
Please make a clear definition of "personal attack", or abandon the policy
of prohibiting "personal attack" because fascism admins and the admins who
are similar to fascists cannot understand the meaning of "personal attack"
and abuse "personal attack" in order to defend the selfish admins
and block innocent Wikipedians.
So there is no "community", no "consensus", and no meaningful
"conversations" in Japanese Wikipedia including its mailing list,
though admins insist as if there are.
It is very clear that the admins always reject meaningful conversations
anywhere including the mailing list.
The admins of English Wikipedia have the same tendency.
The admins themselves make it impossible to occur real "conversation",
"community" and real "consensus".
This is already famous truth in Japan, so, even Jimmy Wales .
I have to ask :
Who left the first important adminship of Japanese Wikipedia to
[[:ja:User:Tietew]](=[[:ja:User:Aphaia]], [[:ja:User:しるふぃ]], etc.), and
Please remove all of them from Japanese Wikipedia
and leave "the first important adminship of Japanese Wikipedia" to
responsible pure Japanese
who are born and have been living in Japan from his/her ancestors, whose
ancestors are not Koreans or Chinese.
And/Or, I hope English Wikipedia show the better model of Wikipedia as
It's the easiest because it is obvious that English Wikipedia has good
admins and good Wikipedians more than any other Wikipedias.
So, I think :
First of all, English Wikipedia needs the board of inspectors to
and remove inappropriate admins and right the wrong made by admins.
Second, English Wikipedia make the system where the inspector(judge)
be the admin(prosecutor) forever and the admin cannot be the inspector
Third, let other Wikipedias imitate English Wikipedia.
The composition of "admins vs ordinary Wikipedians" is not good.
The composition of "ordinary Wikipedians vs admins vs inspectors" is much
The admins investigate all the editors and all the articles and
The inspectors investigate the behaviors of admins and receive all kind
criticisms of the admins even if those criticism are called "personal
attack" by the admins themselves.
It is very clear that blocking made by a admin(admins) is the heaviest
and reverting made by a admin(admins) is the second heaviest "personal
To insist "Those admins are wrong because xxxxxx" or "He is inappropriate
for adminship because xxxxx" is never "personal attack", just judgement
Therefore admins have no rights to accuse anyone by the term "personal
I hope wise Wikipedians create the independent organization to judge
in English Wikipedia.
That is needed by ordinary Wikipedians of other language's because they
can't or wouldn't become a admin.
Please show the American's and/or British superior humanity and excellent
It is because many articles of English Wikipedia, including Wikipedia's
policies, have been translated into other languages' .
Thank you. Thank you for my broken English.
Get real-time traffic reports with Windows Live Local Search
Wikipedia-l mailing list